OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 23, 2014, 03:59:58 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Historical reasons for EC churches  (Read 1588 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,610



« on: June 30, 2013, 05:53:20 PM »

Has any of the Eastern Catholic churches born out of theological reasons like a realization that "Hey, we NEED to be in communion with Rome"? I don't really know much about Eastern Catholicism but for all I know about it seems that most EC churches were born out of political turmoil and not for theological reasons whereas present justification for Eastern Catholicism comes from theology. That seems fairly inconsistent and I would like to know whether my observation is correct.

I hope I don't regret asking this. Maybe we could be nice for each other for a change instead of usual polemics? angel
Logged
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Crypto-Miaphysite
Posts: 4,219



« Reply #1 on: June 30, 2013, 06:26:26 PM »

I hope I don't regret asking this. Maybe we could be nice for each other for a change instead of usual polemics? angel

One can only hope. I'm also interested in this topic.

The Melkite schism, was that for purposes of theology? It seems less of a political turmoil situation, and perhaps something else entirely but IDK.
Logged

Liberalochian: Unionist-Ecumenism Lite™
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,638


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #2 on: June 30, 2013, 06:50:51 PM »

I hope I don't regret asking this. Maybe we could be nice for each other for a change instead of usual polemics? angel

One can only hope. I'm also interested in this topic.

The Melkite schism, was that for purposes of theology? It seems less of a political turmoil situation, and perhaps something else entirely but IDK.

I no longer have my Melkite history books as I donated them to the church library.

However, in those books, written by Melkite hierarchs, it was bluntly stated that the Franciscans were sent into the Levant to instruct Orthodox Christians about Roman Catholicism. So, it was a political movement. During that time, Orthodox Christians were being persecuted by the Turks, so those who crossed over to Rome were hoping for protection on the seas and in their country from radical Muslims.

Today, both Melkites and Orthodox Christians realize the violent nature of radical Islam, and that neither Constantinople nor Rome can protect Christians. Witness the violent beheading of that Franciscan monk.

While I was reading those Melkite history books, I asked a Melkite Priest if the conversion to Eastern Catholicism was for political reasons, and he stated, "Yes." Then I asked him if he considered Eastern Orthodoxy to be heretical, and he stated, "No, we believe the same doctrines as do the Eastern Orthodox. The only difference is that Melkites honor the Pope during the Divine Liturgy."
« Last Edit: June 30, 2013, 06:53:02 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Crypto-Miaphysite
Posts: 4,219



« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2013, 07:16:28 PM »

I no longer have my Melkite history books as I donated them to the church library.

However, in those books, written by Melkite hierarchs, it was bluntly stated that the Franciscans were sent into the Levant to instruct Orthodox Christians about Roman Catholicism. So, it was a political movement. During that time, Orthodox Christians were being persecuted by the Turks, so those who crossed over to Rome were hoping for protection on the seas and in their country from radical Muslims.

Today, both Melkites and Orthodox Christians realize the violent nature of radical Islam, and that neither Constantinople nor Rome can protect Christians. Witness the violent beheading of that Franciscan monk.

While I was reading those Melkite history books, I asked a Melkite Priest if the conversion to Eastern Catholicism was for political reasons, and he stated, "Yes." Then I asked him if he considered Eastern Orthodoxy to be heretical, and he stated, "No, we believe the same doctrines as do the Eastern Orthodox. The only difference is that Melkites honor the Pope during the Divine Liturgy."

So still political, but somewhat different than what ushered in the Union of Brest.

Does anyone know about the establishment of the other Eastern Catholics of non-Chalcedonian or ACOE background being political or not?
Logged

Liberalochian: Unionist-Ecumenism Lite™
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #4 on: June 30, 2013, 08:33:56 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 16,170


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 30, 2013, 08:40:08 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.

Not knowing their situations, I'll take your word for it.  Where can one read more about this history?   

In India, the formation of the Eastern Catholic Churches was certainly politics.   
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #6 on: June 30, 2013, 09:04:47 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.

Not knowing their situations, I'll take your word for it.  Where can one read more about this history?   

In India, the formation of the Eastern Catholic Churches was certainly politics.   
Mostly their websites and Catholic Encyclopedias, unfortunately.  All the scholarly work, at least in English, is on the Byzantine Churches.

The Syro-Malabar subjugation is probably the saddest in the history of the unions, which makes the union of Mar Ivanios even more astounding.  Perhaps, you can speak on this.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 16,170


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 30, 2013, 10:02:56 PM »

The Syro-Malabar subjugation is probably the saddest in the history of the unions, which makes the union of Mar Ivanios even more astounding.  Perhaps, you can speak on this.

Of course, there are two versions of the Mar Ivanios saga, but both versions have politics in common. 

At the time of the Syro-Malankara Church's formation, the Orthodox in India were divided between the autocephalous faction and that still remaining under Antioch (this division, in turn, was in part due to the inability of Antioch to provide good leadership from a geographic and cultural distance resulting in, among other things, unknowingly ordaining a bishop for a Protestant breakaway sect).  Mar Ivanios was a bishop of the autocephalous Orthodox Church, a founder of a monastic "order", an educated man.  As such, he was involved in leadership at a time of turmoil for the local community. 

The Syro-Malankara claim is that Mar Ivanios was commissioned by the autocephalous Orthodox synod to approach Rome with a plan for a "Unia": since they were not recognised as legitimate by the then reigning Patriarch of Antioch, this would be a way of becoming "legitimate".  He made contacts with the Roman Church, worked up a plan that would allow our administration and traditions to remain intact while being in communion with Rome, etc., but the Orthodox synod backed off at the last minute, and he chose to go ahead anyway. 

The Orthodox claim, in a nutshell, is that he recognised an opportunity to become the head of his own Church rather than contest for the equivalent post in the Orthodox Church (and not get it).  And he decided to go for it...a simple power play.  In all my years of being interested in this stuff, no one has yet produced any synod documents or other "proof" that the Orthodox Church wanted to "go Roman": there's more substance in the claims that they approached ROCOR and/or Moscow as the Assyrians did a century or so before. 

Because I know they approached the Russians at a time of turmoil, I'm sure there is some truth to the idea that "someone" suggested trying Rome.  I just think that someone was Mar Ivanios, or perhaps it wasn't a serious suggestion but Mar Ivanios ran with it.  Both versions end with him doing his own thing apart from the rest of his brother bishops (except one, who went with him) and becoming a primate.  Oddly enough, the maintenance of our traditions, which was part of the original deal, was quickly rescinded: they themselves chose mandatory celibacy, unleavened bread, Latin devotions, etc.  But they are among the most "Orthodox" of the Eastern Catholic Churches in liturgical terms, despite these sorts of innovations, and there are a few customs which they preserve which we don't, and I'd like to see make a comeback. 

The Syro-Malabar union is truly a sad story, a shameful episode in East-West relations, in "ecumenism", in missionary work, you name it.  The Syro-Malankara union doesn't come close...that was pure politics.  In both cases, "the faith" came later.       
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 16,170


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 30, 2013, 10:07:27 PM »

All the scholarly work, at least in English, is on the Byzantine Churches.


In general, I find this to be a discouraging state of affairs, but particularly so for Catholics.  RC's routinely recruit "the East" when they want to talk about doctrinal purity, proper liturgical praxis, etc., but their generalisations are almost all based on the Byzantine tradition.  If they explored the other traditions, they'd not only get a wider perspective of "the East", but they'd see that there are aspects of traditional Roman liturgy and doctrinal expression which have parallels in the East that are not themselves Latinisations. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
surajiype
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Malankara Orthodox Church
Posts: 196


« Reply #9 on: July 01, 2013, 12:28:45 AM »

In the case of Mar Ivanios (the founder of the Syro-Malankara Rite), the role of the Syrian Catholic Patriarch Ephrem Rahmani ( d 1929) is most important. The SMC themselves claim that Patriarch Rahmani was the person in touch with Mar Ivanios during the period the Metropolitan in India, was exploring the Roman option.  Pat. Rahmani is also said to have sent the Syrian Catholic book of Anaphorae and other texts to Mar Ivanios. 

I think the majority of discussions seemed to have taken place between Met Ivanios and Pat. Rahmani. The Easter Catholic hierarchs in India do not seem to be have been in the loop. Rahmani of course was a great scholar and luminary who presided over the zenith of the Syrian Catholic church, when they greatly expanded at the cost of the Syrian Orthodox, with even the Catholic Patriarchate being moved from their tradition centre at Aleppo to Syrian Orthodox stronghold of Mardin(causing no small amount of discord and trouble). 

By and by the discussions between Rome and the Malankara church, seem to have been discussions between Met. Ivanios and Rome and from the Orthodox perspective there seems to little evidence that other members of the Synod were fully aware of the extent to which these discussions had gone. 
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #10 on: July 01, 2013, 01:50:00 AM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
Which time for the Copts?  Mardukm's church had a number of starts (because those who submitted returned to Orthodoxy).

The Syriac founder was trying to persuade the patriarchs to submit to the Vatican, one patriarch consecrating him anyways, another imprisoning him.

Mekhitar came to Venice (and the Vatican) to secure the material benefits and assylum for a revival of Armenian educational and cultural opportunities.

The Chaldeans started as a schism among the Nestorians, the schimating side needing a Metropolitan to confirm their choice of patriarch, and they resorted to the Vatican doing it.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,046


« Reply #11 on: July 01, 2013, 04:02:00 AM »

Anba Athanasius of Jerusalem became Roman in 1741, and was ordained Vicar Apostolic of the Coptic Catholics (less than 2,000 at that time) in 1781. He later returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church. I don't think the attempts that the Romans point to before him (e.g., at Florence in the 15th century) really count, as it was apparently only in his wake that the Coptic Catholic church actually continued on with other people after he left it to return to Orthodoxy. I don't really know much more than that about the Coptic Catholics, but they're one of the smallest Eastern Catholic churches (~164,000 people around the world, as of 2010), and they don't have any monastics.

Copts without monastics. Now that ain't right.

But the Romans didn't show up to Egypt until the 16th century or so, and were apparently not popular at any point with the people, so I guess it's not surprising that they're such a small church. You can watch a little bit of their religious ritual here, filmed at the Coptic Catholic Church in Los Angeles, one of only two Coptic Catholic churches in the United States (the other is listed on Byzcath directory as Resurrection Coptic Catholic Chapel in NYC, though it appears they have a few communities in other states that no doubt use local Latin or Byzantine churches).
« Last Edit: July 01, 2013, 04:04:39 AM by dzheremi » Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #12 on: July 01, 2013, 10:55:29 AM »

Anba Athanasius of Jerusalem became Roman in 1741, and was ordained Vicar Apostolic of the Coptic Catholics (less than 2,000 at that time) in 1781. He later returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church. I don't think the attempts that the Romans point to before him (e.g., at Florence in the 15th century) really count, as it was apparently only in his wake that the Coptic Catholic church actually continued on with other people after he left it to return to Orthodoxy. I don't really know much more than that about the Coptic Catholics, but they're one of the smallest Eastern Catholic churches (~164,000 people around the world, as of 2010), and they don't have any monastics.

Copts without monastics. Now that ain't right.

But the Romans didn't show up to Egypt until the 16th century or so, and were apparently not popular at any point with the people, so I guess it's not surprising that they're such a small church. You can watch a little bit of their religious ritual here, filmed at the Coptic Catholic Church in Los Angeles, one of only two Coptic Catholic churches in the United States (the other is listed on Byzcath directory as Resurrection Coptic Catholic Chapel in NYC, though it appears they have a few communities in other states that no doubt use local Latin or Byzantine churches).
I seem to recall their "patriarch" (he is forbidden the traditional title of the primate of Alexandria-"pope") visiting a community in TN.  He brought up the issue of having married priests in America.  Lots of luck on that.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,106



« Reply #13 on: July 01, 2013, 10:18:03 PM »

I hope I don't regret asking this. Maybe we could be nice for each other for a change instead of usual polemics? angel

Let's hope. Quite frankly, if there's any topic that makes Orthodox crazy, it's Eastern Catholicism.

Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 16,170


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #14 on: July 01, 2013, 11:51:53 PM »

We don't need a topic. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,106



« Reply #15 on: July 02, 2013, 07:14:22 AM »

I seem to recall their "patriarch" (he is forbidden the traditional title of the primate of Alexandria-"pope")

Will you sign a petition to have that title applied to him?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,207


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 02, 2013, 07:55:21 AM »

We don't need a topic. 

pom?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #17 on: July 16, 2013, 01:54:20 AM »

I seem to recall their "patriarch" (he is forbidden the traditional title of the primate of Alexandria-"pope")

Will you sign a petition to have that title applied to him?
If I had to straighten out all the irregularities of the Vatican, when would it end?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Orest
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 954


« Reply #18 on: July 16, 2013, 08:47:25 AM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #19 on: July 16, 2013, 03:07:22 PM »

I seem to recall their "patriarch" (he is forbidden the traditional title of the primate of Alexandria-"pope") visiting a community in TN.  He brought up the issue of having married priests in America.  Lots of luck on that.

You repeat this claim over and over but where is the proof that he was forbidden the title as opposed to not adopting it to avoid antagonizing the Coptic Orthodox?

As to married priests, if we late adopter Ruthenians have them why would the Copts have a problem?
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #20 on: July 16, 2013, 03:24:20 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.
In fact in the case of the Syriacs, Armenians, and Chaldeans the Orthodox faction, who were recognized millets under the Ottomans, persecuted the Catholic faction.  In the case of the Syriacs and Armenians, the Catholic Patriarchs fled to Lebanon and the protection of the Maronites and their patriarchal residences remain in Beirut to this day.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #21 on: July 16, 2013, 03:35:51 PM »

I seem to recall their "patriarch" (he is forbidden the traditional title of the primate of Alexandria-"pope") visiting a community in TN.  He brought up the issue of having married priests in America.  Lots of luck on that.

You repeat this claim over and over but where is the proof that he was forbidden the title as opposed to not adopting it to avoid antagonizing the Coptic Orthodox?
for one, that would be a first in the annals of the Vatican's Drang nach Osten.

He was preceded by centuries by the "bishop of Alexandria" ever resident in Old Rome.  He could have adopted the title without antagonizing (any further) the Orthodox living in Alexandria, as they never heard of or from him (except the little invasion with Louis of France, which Copt, Melkite and Muslim alike fought to repulse).

As to married priests, if we late adopter Ruthenians have them why would the Copts have a problem?
Why don't you ask him?  Or better yet, your supreme pontiff, who calls himself "THE Pope."
« Last Edit: July 16, 2013, 03:38:07 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #22 on: July 16, 2013, 04:00:50 PM »

for one, that would be a first in the annals of the Vatican's Drang nach Osten.

He was preceded by centuries by the "bishop of Alexandria" ever resident in Old Rome.  He could have adopted the title without antagonizing (any further) the Orthodox living in Alexandria, as they never heard of or from him (except the little invasion with Louis of France, which Copt, Melkite and Muslim alike fought to repulse).

I am talking of the Coptic Catholic Patriarch resident in Alexandria not the now abolished Latin titular resident in Rome.  I would suspect the lack of conflict between Coptic Orthodox and Coptic Catholics is due in large part to the deference given.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #23 on: July 16, 2013, 04:02:43 PM »

Why don't you ask him?  Or better yet, your supreme pontiff, who calls himself "THE Pope."

No need, and the current supreme pontiff calls himself Bishop of Rome or haven't you been paying attention.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #24 on: July 16, 2013, 05:21:44 PM »

Why don't you ask him?  Or better yet, your supreme pontiff, who calls himself "THE Pope."

No need, and the current supreme pontiff calls himself Bishop of Rome or haven't you been paying attention.
I wasn't aware of the latest revision of the CCC:
Quote
The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.

869 The Church is apostolic. She is built on a lasting foundation: "the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (⇒ Rev 21:14). She is indestructible (cf ⇒ Mt 16:18). She is upheld infallibly in the truth: Christ governs her through Peter and the other apostles, who are present in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops.

870 "The sole Church of Christ which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, . . . subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him. Nevertheless, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside its visible confines"(LG Cool.

The episcopal college and its head, the Pope
879 Sacramental ministry in the Church, then, is at once a collegial and a personal service, exercised in the name of Christ. This is evidenced by the bonds between the episcopal college and its head, the successor of St. Peter, and in the relationship between the bishop's pastoral responsibility for his particular church and the common solicitude of the episcopal college for the universal Church

880 When Christ instituted the Twelve, "he constituted [them] in the form of a college or permanent assembly, at the head of which he placed Peter, chosen from among them." Just as "by the Lord's institution, St. Peter and the rest of the apostles constitute a single apostolic college, so in like fashion the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, and the bishops, the successors of the apostles, are related with and united to one another."

881 The Lord made Simon alone, whom he named Peter, the "rock" of his Church. He gave him the keys of his Church and instituted him shepherd of the whole flock. "The office of binding and loosing which was given to Peter was also assigned to the college of apostles united to its head." This pastoral office of Peter and the other apostles belongs to the Church's very foundation and is continued by the bishops under the primacy of the Pope.

882 The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful." "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered."

883 "The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff."

884 "The college of bishops exercises power over the universal Church in a solemn manner in an ecumenical council." But "there never is an ecumenical council which is not confirmed or at least recognized as such by Peter's successor."

895 "The power which they exercise personally in the name of Christ, is proper, ordinary, and immediate, although its exercise is ultimately controlled by the supreme authority of the Church." But the bishops should not be thought of as vicars of the Pope.
Roll Eyes
Of course not.  Too much honesty.
Quote
His ordinary and immediate authority over the whole Church does not annul, but on the contrary confirms and defends that of the bishops. Their authority must be exercised in communion with the whole Church under the guidance of the Pope.

899 The initiative of lay Christians is necessary especially when the matter involves discovering or inventing the means for permeating social, political, and economic realities with the demands of Christian doctrine and life. This initiative is a normal element of the life of the Church:

Lay believers are in the front line of Church life; for them the Church is the animating principle of human society. Therefore, they in particular ought to have an ever-clearer consciousness not only of belonging to the Church, but of being the Church, that is to say, the community of the faithful on earth under the leadership of the Pope, the common Head, and of the bishops in communion with him. They are the Church

937 The Pope enjoys, by divine institution, "supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls" (CD 2).

939 Helped by the priests, their co-workers, and by the deacons, the bishops have the duty of authentically teaching the faith, celebrating divine worship, above all the Eucharist, and guiding their Churches as true pastors. Their responsibility also includes concern for all the Churches, with and under the Pope.

1354 In the anamnesis that follows, the Church calls to mind the Passion, resurrection, and glorious return of Christ Jesus; she presents to the Father the offering of his Son which reconciles us with him.
 In the intercessions, the Church indicates that the Eucharist is celebrated in communion with the whole Church in heaven and on earth, the living and the dead, and in communion with the pastors of the Church, the Pope, the diocesan bishop, his presbyterium and his deacons, and all the bishops of the whole world together with their Churches.

1369 The whole Church is united with the offering and intercession of Christ. Since he has the ministry of Peter in the Church, the Pope is associated with every celebration of the Eucharist, wherein he is named as the sign and servant of the unity of the universal Church. the bishop of the place is always responsible for the Eucharist, even when a priest presides; the bishop's name is mentioned to signify his presidency over the particular Church, in the midst of his presbyterium and with the assistance of deacons. the community intercedes also for all ministers who, for it and with it, offer the Eucharistic sacrifice:

Let only that Eucharist be regarded as legitimate, which is celebrated under [the presidency of] the bishop or him to whom he has entrusted it.

Through the ministry of priests the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful is completed in union with the sacrifice of Christ the only Mediator, which in the Eucharist is offered through the priests' hands in the name of the whole Church in an unbloody and sacramental manner until the Lord himself comes.
This commemoration of the bishop of Rome, btw, is one of the most direct indications of the Vatican twisting the Tradition of the First Millenium to bend with its own Second Millenium heresies.

So too this reinterpretation of the Office of the Keys:
Quote
1462 Forgiveness of sins brings reconciliation with God, but also with the Church. Since ancient times the bishop, visible head of a particular Church, has thus rightfully been considered to be the one who principally has the power and ministry of reconciliation: he is the moderator of the penitential discipline. Priests, his collaborators, exercise it to the extent that they have received the commission either from their bishop (or religious superior) or the Pope, according to the law of the Church.

1463 Certain particularly grave sins incur excommunication, the most severe ecclesiastical penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts, and for which absolution consequently cannot be granted, according to canon law, except by the Pope, the bishop of the place or priests authorized by them. In danger of death any priest, even if deprived of faculties for hearing confessions, can absolve from every sin and excommunication.

1594 The bishop receives the fullness of the sacrament of Holy Orders, which integrates him into the episcopal college and makes him the visible head of the particular Church entrusted to him. As successors of the apostles and members of the college, the bishops share in the apostolic responsibility and mission of the whole Church under the authority of the Pope, successor of St. Peter.

2034 The Roman Pontiff and the bishops are "authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach the faith to the people entrusted to them, the faith to be believed and put into practice." The ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Pope and the bishops in communion with him teach the faithful the truth to believe, the charity to practice, the beatitude to hope for.
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.


You should inform your Copts, Deacon, they keep on referring to your supreme pontiff, er, bishop as "the Pope"
http://coptcatholic.net/category/40/60/61/
I don't recall how the commemoration is handled in their Mass (yes, I've been to many, but it has been a while).  I'm quite sure your "bishop" is "bi-Baba" there as well, but their cardinal wasn't.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #25 on: July 16, 2013, 05:46:25 PM »

for one, that would be a first in the annals of the Vatican's Drang nach Osten.

He was preceded by centuries by the "bishop of Alexandria" ever resident in Old Rome.  He could have adopted the title without antagonizing (any further) the Orthodox living in Alexandria, as they never heard of or from him (except the little invasion with Louis of France, which Copt, Melkite and Muslim alike fought to repulse).

I am talking of the Coptic Catholic Patriarch resident in Alexandria not the now abolished Latin titular resident in Rome.  I would suspect the lack of conflict between Coptic Orthodox and Coptic Catholics is due in large part to the deference given.
due in a large part to the lack of a secular authority subservient to the Vatican, and as a consequence the Orthodox vastly outnumbering those who have submitted.

Funny, when the "union" isn't achieved by force, it usually results in a lack of conflict.  The Melkites are another example, as are, AFAIK, the Armenians.  The Greeks, Ukrainians, Ruthenians, Ethiopians/Eritreans, not so much.

Btw, your Coptic Patriarch is resident in Cairo.  But close enough.

The abolition of the Latin titular patriarch of Alexandria in Rome was in the lifetime of our fathers, nearly our own lifetimes.  And the appropriation of his Patriarchal Metochion of St. Paul-Outside-the-Walls was appropriated by the Pope, er, bishop of Rome within our adulthood.  As such, the Copt has that precedent to deal with, as does the Vatican's Maronite, Melkite and Syriac Patriarchs  in Antioch-except their Latin forbear once did seize Antioch.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #26 on: July 16, 2013, 07:57:47 PM »

due in a large part to the lack of a secular authority subservient to the Vatican, and as a consequence the Orthodox vastly outnumbering those who have submitted.

Funny, when the "union" isn't achieved by force, it usually results in a lack of conflict.  The Melkites are another example, as are, AFAIK, the Armenians.  The Greeks, Ukrainians, Ruthenians, Ethiopians/Eritreans, not so much.

The Greeks weren't united by force and neither were the Ruthenians unless you're counting the trouble they got from the Hungarian Calvinist overlords.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,182


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #27 on: July 17, 2013, 12:34:50 AM »

Anba Athanasius of Jerusalem became Roman in 1741, and was ordained Vicar Apostolic of the Coptic Catholics (less than 2,000 at that time) in 1781. He later returned to the Coptic Orthodox Church. I don't think the attempts that the Romans point to before him (e.g., at Florence in the 15th century) really count, as it was apparently only in his wake that the Coptic Catholic church actually continued on with other people after he left it to return to Orthodoxy. I don't really know much more than that about the Coptic Catholics, but they're one of the smallest Eastern Catholic churches (~164,000 people around the world, as of 2010), and they don't have any monastics.

Copts without monastics. Now that ain't right.

But the Romans didn't show up to Egypt until the 16th century or so, and were apparently not popular at any point with the people, so I guess it's not surprising that they're such a small church. You can watch a little bit of their religious ritual here, filmed at the Coptic Catholic Church in Los Angeles, one of only two Coptic Catholic churches in the United States (the other is listed on Byzcath directory as Resurrection Coptic Catholic Chapel in NYC, though it appears they have a few communities in other states that no doubt use local Latin or Byzantine churches).
I seem to recall their "patriarch" (he is forbidden the traditional title of the primate of Alexandria-"pope") visiting a community in TN.  He brought up the issue of having married priests in America.  Lots of luck on that.
My Byzantine Parish has a married priest.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #28 on: July 17, 2013, 06:17:54 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.
In fact in the case of the Syriacs, Armenians, and Chaldeans the Orthodox faction, who were recognized millets under the Ottomans, persecuted the Catholic faction.  In the case of the Syriacs and Armenians, the Catholic Patriarchs fled to Lebanon and the protection of the Maronites and their patriarchal residences remain in Beirut to this day.

Orthodox Chaldeans? Like those who joined MP Church of Russia in XIXth century?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #29 on: July 17, 2013, 06:29:37 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.
In fact in the case of the Syriacs, Armenians, and Chaldeans the Orthodox faction, who were recognized millets under the Ottomans, persecuted the Catholic faction.  In the case of the Syriacs and Armenians, the Catholic Patriarchs fled to Lebanon and the protection of the Maronites and their patriarchal residences remain in Beirut to this day.

Orthodox Chaldeans? Like those who joined MP Church of Russia in XIXth century?

No, I meant the Assyrian Church of the East.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,106



« Reply #30 on: July 17, 2013, 07:41:28 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.
In fact in the case of the Syriacs, Armenians, and Chaldeans the Orthodox faction, who were recognized millets under the Ottomans, persecuted the Catholic faction.  In the case of the Syriacs and Armenians, the Catholic Patriarchs fled to Lebanon and the protection of the Maronites and their patriarchal residences remain in Beirut to this day.

Orthodox Chaldeans? Like those who joined MP Church of Russia in XIXth century?

No, I meant the Assyrian Church of the East.

The ACoE had an Orthodox faction?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 16,170


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #31 on: July 17, 2013, 07:49:46 PM »

The ACoE had an Orthodox faction?

In terms of a non-Catholic faction, yes.  And in terms of an East Syriac rite Church which accepted Ephesus, yes too. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #32 on: July 17, 2013, 07:51:30 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.
In fact in the case of the Syriacs, Armenians, and Chaldeans the Orthodox faction, who were recognized millets under the Ottomans, persecuted the Catholic faction.  In the case of the Syriacs and Armenians, the Catholic Patriarchs fled to Lebanon and the protection of the Maronites and their patriarchal residences remain in Beirut to this day.

Orthodox Chaldeans? Like those who joined MP Church of Russia in XIXth century?

No, I meant the Assyrian Church of the East.

The ACoE had an Orthodox faction?
In the context of my original post I simply meant the Non-Union faction.  Historically, yes, some Assyrians in the Urmia region united with the Russian Orthodox Church but they ceased using the Assyrian Rite and were required to use the Byzantine Rite translated into Syriac.  They have ceased to exist except for a single parish in Baghdad that is no longer in communion with the Russian Church.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Orest
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 954


« Reply #33 on: July 25, 2013, 01:49:51 PM »

due in a large part to the lack of a secular authority subservient to the Vatican, and as a consequence the Orthodox vastly outnumbering those who have submitted.

Funny, when the "union" isn't achieved by force, it usually results in a lack of conflict.  The Melkites are another example, as are, AFAIK, the Armenians.  The Greeks, Ukrainians, Ruthenians, Ethiopians/Eritreans, not so much.

The Greeks weren't united by force and neither were the Ruthenians unless you're counting the trouble they got from the Hungarian Calvinist overlords.

How about the Hapsburg rulers?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #34 on: July 25, 2013, 03:33:19 PM »

due in a large part to the lack of a secular authority subservient to the Vatican, and as a consequence the Orthodox vastly outnumbering those who have submitted.

Funny, when the "union" isn't achieved by force, it usually results in a lack of conflict.  The Melkites are another example, as are, AFAIK, the Armenians.  The Greeks, Ukrainians, Ruthenians, Ethiopians/Eritreans, not so much.

The Greeks weren't united by force and neither were the Ruthenians unless you're counting the trouble they got from the Hungarian Calvinist overlords.

How about the Hapsburg rulers?
Shhhhhhhhh!

Those waskowee Calvinists!  I understand that the overlord was appointing a die hard Orthodox opponent of the "Union of Brest," so its supporters decided to deceive another Orthodox hierarch to consecrate their choice.

As for the Greeks, force has been used ever since Abp. Hormisdas of Old Rome told the Emperor of New Rome to use force to secure the signatures of those bishops refusing to sign his "Formula."

And of course, the Polish Crown provided such a hospitable environment for the Orthodox, especially after King Sigismund Vasa installed the Counter-Reformation in the lands he could (he lost his crown in Sweden in his attempt there, and lost the Russian throne for his son and heir insisting on it in Moscow).

But the Calvinists helped us there.  But evidently we are supposed to get all our Western influences from the Vatican.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2013, 03:34:48 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #35 on: July 25, 2013, 03:36:08 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.
In fact in the case of the Syriacs, Armenians, and Chaldeans the Orthodox faction, who were recognized millets under the Ottomans, persecuted the Catholic faction.  In the case of the Syriacs and Armenians, the Catholic Patriarchs fled to Lebanon and the protection of the Maronites and their patriarchal residences remain in Beirut to this day.

Orthodox Chaldeans? Like those who joined MP Church of Russia in XIXth century?

No, I meant the Assyrian Church of the East.

The ACoE had an Orthodox faction?
In the context of my original post I simply meant the Non-Union faction.  Historically, yes, some Assyrians in the Urmia region united with the Russian Orthodox Church but they ceased using the Assyrian Rite and were required to use the Byzantine Rite translated into Syriac.  They have ceased to exist except for a single parish in Baghdad that is no longer in communion with the Russian Church.
Then who are in communion with?

Btw, their bishop ended up in the Chicago ROCOR diocese.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #36 on: July 25, 2013, 09:40:51 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.
In fact in the case of the Syriacs, Armenians, and Chaldeans the Orthodox faction, who were recognized millets under the Ottomans, persecuted the Catholic faction.  In the case of the Syriacs and Armenians, the Catholic Patriarchs fled to Lebanon and the protection of the Maronites and their patriarchal residences remain in Beirut to this day.

Orthodox Chaldeans? Like those who joined MP Church of Russia in XIXth century?

No, I meant the Assyrian Church of the East.

The ACoE had an Orthodox faction?
In the context of my original post I simply meant the Non-Union faction.  Historically, yes, some Assyrians in the Urmia region united with the Russian Orthodox Church but they ceased using the Assyrian Rite and were required to use the Byzantine Rite translated into Syriac.  They have ceased to exist except for a single parish in Baghdad that is no longer in communion with the Russian Church.
Then who are in communion with?

Btw, their bishop ended up in the Chicago ROCOR diocese.

Nobody I guess.  I am aware of Bishop John.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #37 on: July 25, 2013, 10:16:46 PM »

Those waskowee Calvinists!  I understand that the overlord was appointing a die hard Orthodox opponent of the "Union of Brest," so its supporters decided to deceive another Orthodox hierarch to consecrate their choice.

Your understanding is wrong.   

She appointed a crypto-Calvinist, Joannicus Zejkan, "consecrated" by twelve other crypto-Calvinist presbyters.  The Carpatho-Rus who decided to enter union with Rome sent Fr Peter Parthenius to the Metropolitan of Alba Iulia, Stephen Simonovic, who said: "Would that I too could profess the same Union."  No deception.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,580



« Reply #38 on: July 25, 2013, 11:30:47 PM »

The Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Chaldean Catholic Churches all started with a hierarch deciding communion with Rome was important for theological reasons and seeking union.
really?  No hint of free education, medical care, protection?  What the Chines call "rice" Christians from the days when Christian missionaries bribed converts with free rice.

exactly
Logged
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 16,170


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #39 on: July 26, 2013, 12:21:33 AM »

She appointed a crypto-Calvinist, Joannicus Zejkan, "consecrated" by twelve other crypto-Calvinist presbyters

There were a few of those happening at roughly the same time period.  We had one in India, but all the priests involved were Orthodox.  Strange times call for strange solutions? 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,390



« Reply #40 on: July 26, 2013, 11:02:54 AM »

Those waskowee Calvinists!  I understand that the overlord was appointing a die hard Orthodox opponent of the "Union of Brest," so its supporters decided to deceive another Orthodox hierarch to consecrate their choice.

Your understanding is wrong.  

She appointed a crypto-Calvinist, Joannicus Zejkan, "consecrated" by twelve other crypto-Calvinist presbyters.  The Carpatho-Rus who decided to enter union with Rome sent Fr Peter Parthenius to the Metropolitan of Alba Iulia, Stephen Simonovic, who said: "Would that I too could profess the same Union."  No deception.
Yeah, IIRC even your supreme pontiff at the time didn't buy that story.

Nothing "crypto-" about it: the Metropolitans, including Stefan Simonovic and the rest of the Orthodox were officially under the Calvinist superintendent.  And yet they remained Orthodox-supported by neighboring Moldavia and Wallachia (where the Metropolitan of Transylvania was consecrated, by the Metropolitan of Ugro-Valahia, including the monk that the Emperor Leopold sent in order to set up, by deceit, the "Romanian Church United with Rome, Greek-Catholic.

And of course, the Calvinists in Poland did an invaluable service for the Orthodox by keeping the Counter-Reformation at bay while the Ukrainian Orthodox Church got its act together.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2013, 11:04:11 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.159 seconds with 68 queries.